uu.seUppsala University Publications
Change search
Link to record
Permanent link

Direct link
BETA
Publications (10 of 11) Show all publications
Larsson, J. (2019). Becoming a physics teacher: Disciplinary discourses and the development of professional identity. (Licentiate dissertation). Uppsala
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Becoming a physics teacher: Disciplinary discourses and the development of professional identity
2019 (English)Licentiate thesis, comprehensive summary (Other academic)
Abstract [en]

In this Licentiate thesis I examine the system of physics teacher education. Physics teacher education is important because it is one of the main ways to influence how physics is taught in schools. By extension, physics teacher education has the potential to affect both who chooses to pursue physics as a career and how physics is perceived by Swedish society as a whole. In order to approach this problem, I chose to investigate the professional discourses of Swedish physics teacher educators. I focus on how these discourses potentially afford and constrain trainees’ possibilities of performing a professional physics teacher identity. While the topic of teacher identity has been extensively explored in the literature, the influence of the educational environment on what it means to become a physics teacher has remained very sparsely researched. Theoretically, I view identity as socially constructed in discourse. I connect identity to trainee learning by arguing that what trainees learn will be dependent on their possibilities to perform professional physics teacher identities in their educational programme. Using discourse analysis of interviews with physics teacher educators, I identify four discourse models. These four models paint a picture of the educational program as fragmented with no coherent way of viewing the educational program as a whole. I further suggest that the culture of physics departments plays a pivotal role in the success or otherwise of creating good quality physics teacher education. I demonstrate how an implicit assumption, that the purpose of teaching physics is to create physics experts, appears to unintentionally undermine and devalue physics teacher education within physics departments. The findings presented in this thesis have the potential to inspire teacher educators and physics faculty to examine their own assumptions about what the goal of physics teaching is, and to facilitate the negotiations needed to create a common understanding of the goals of the physics teacher education.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Uppsala: , 2019. p. 108
Keywords
physics teacher education, discourse analysis, professional identity
National Category
Physical Sciences Educational Sciences
Research subject
Physics with specialization in Physics Education
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:uu:diva-397002 (URN)
Presentation
2020-01-15, Room Å80121, Ångströmlaboratoriet, Lägerhyddsvägen 1, Uppsala, 10:15 (English)
Opponent
Supervisors
Available from: 2019-12-09 Created: 2019-11-19 Last updated: 2019-12-09Bibliographically approved
Larsson, J., Airey, J., Danielsson, A. & Lundqvist, E. (2018). A Fragmented Training Environment: Discourse Models in the Talk of Physics Teacher Educators. Research in science education
Open this publication in new window or tab >>A Fragmented Training Environment: Discourse Models in the Talk of Physics Teacher Educators
2018 (English)In: Research in science education, ISSN 0157-244X, E-ISSN 1573-1898Article in journal (Refereed) Epub ahead of print
Abstract [en]

This article reports the results of an empirical study exploring the discourses of physics teacher educators. We ask how the expressed understandings of a physics teacher education programme in the talk of teacher educators potentially support the identity construction of new teachers. Nine teacher educators from different sections of a physics teacher programme in Sweden were interviewed. The concept of discourse models was used to operationalise how the discourses of the teacher education programme potentially enable the performance of different physics teacher identities. The analysis resulted in the construction of four discourse models that could be seen to be both enabling and limiting the kinds of identity performances trainee physics teachers can enact. Knowledge of the models thus potentially empowers trainee physics teachers to understand the different goals of their educational programme and from there make informed choices about their own particular approach to becoming a professional physics teacher. We also suggest that for teacher educators, knowledge of the discourse models could facilitate making conscious, informed decisions about their own teaching practice.

Keywords
Teacher education, Physics, Discourse, Identity
National Category
Educational Sciences Physical Sciences Gender Studies
Research subject
Physics with specialization in Physics Education
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:uu:diva-370078 (URN)10.1007/s11165-018-9793-9 (DOI)
Available from: 2018-12-18 Created: 2018-12-18 Last updated: 2019-11-19Bibliographically approved
Adams, J., Avraamidou, L., Bayram-Jacobs, D., Boujaoude, S., Bryan, L., Christodoulou, A., . . . Zembal-Saul, C. (2018). The Role of Science Education in a Changing World. Leiden: NIAS Press
Open this publication in new window or tab >>The Role of Science Education in a Changing World
Show others...
2018 (English)Report (Other academic)
Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Leiden: NIAS Press, 2018. p. 48
National Category
Didactics
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:uu:diva-361331 (URN)
Note

Report produced by the participants of the workshop The Role of Science Education in a Changing world, 8-12/1 2018

Available from: 2018-09-22 Created: 2018-09-22 Last updated: 2018-09-24Bibliographically approved
Larsson, J. & Airey, J. (2017). Four discourse models of physics teacher education. In: : . Paper presented at 6th New Zealand Discourse Conference, 6-9 December 2017 (pp. 1-37). Auckland
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Four discourse models of physics teacher education
2017 (English)Conference paper, Oral presentation with published abstract (Other academic)
Abstract [en]

In Sweden, as in many other countries, the education of high-school physics teachers is typically carried out in three different environments; the education department, the physics department and school itself during teaching practice. Trainee physics teachers are in the process of building their professional identity as they move between these three environments. Although much has been written about teacher professional identity (see overview in Beijaard, Meijer, & Verloop, 2004) little is known about how encounters with the potentially disparate notions of “what counts” in these three environments feed into trainee physics teachers’ professional identity work.

In this paper we try to capture the different ways the educational practice of teacher education is valued in the discourse of teacher educators. We use the concept of discourse models (Gee, 2005). Our research questions are as follows:

1. What is signalled as valued (and not valued) by members of the three environments physics teachers meet during their training (school, education department, physics department)?

2.What discourse models can be identified from these value statements? 


We carried out semi-structured interviews with instructors from the three environments. Our analysis involved iterative coding of the interview transcripts (Bogdan & Biklen, 1992) to construct discourse models. We identify four competing discourse models and discuss the ways in which these models can be seen to be at work, dictating how educational practice is valued.

 

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Auckland: , 2017
Keywords
Discourse models, Teacher training, Physics teaching, identity performances
National Category
Other Physics Topics Didactics
Research subject
Physics with specialization in Physics Education
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:uu:diva-335892 (URN)
Conference
6th New Zealand Discourse Conference, 6-9 December 2017
Funder
Swedish Research Council, 2015-01891
Available from: 2017-12-09 Created: 2017-12-09 Last updated: 2017-12-14Bibliographically approved
Larsson, J., Airey, J. & Lundqvist, E. (2017). How does the culture of physics affect physics teacher education?. In: : . Paper presented at ESERA 2017 Conference Dublin City University, Dublin, Ireland 21st - 25th August 2017.
Open this publication in new window or tab >>How does the culture of physics affect physics teacher education?
2017 (English)Conference paper, Oral presentation with published abstract (Other academic)
Abstract [en]

In this paper we ask how the culture of physics may affect physics teacher education. Our interest is motivated by the pessimistic description of the status of physics teacher education in the US reported by the Task Force on Teacher Education in Physics (T-TEP) (2012). We present the results of an empirical study that examines the culture of physics in Sweden. The main finding is what we call the physics expert model. This was the dominant framing that physicists and physics teachers used in our interviews to talk about physics teacher education. The goal of the physics expert model is to create future physicists, something that is clearly at odds with the purpose of physics teacher education (which is to create future physics teachers). We discuss the implications of the dominance of the physics expert model and suggest that our results offer an important explanatory interpretation of the chronic problems of physics teacher training described in the T-TEP report.

Keywords
Teacher Preparation, Physics, Culture, Lärarutbildning, Fysik, Kultur
National Category
Other Physics Topics Educational Sciences
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:uu:diva-333761 (URN)
Conference
ESERA 2017 Conference Dublin City University, Dublin, Ireland 21st - 25th August 2017
Available from: 2017-11-16 Created: 2017-11-16 Last updated: 2017-11-17Bibliographically approved
Airey, J., Larsson, J. & Linder, A. (2017). Investigating Undergraduate Physics Lecturers’ Disciplinary Literacy Goals For Their Students. In: : . Paper presented at 12th Conference of the European Science Education Research Association (ESERA 2017) DCU Dublin 21-25 Aug. 2017. Dublin: ESERA
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Investigating Undergraduate Physics Lecturers’ Disciplinary Literacy Goals For Their Students
2017 (English)Conference paper, Oral presentation with published abstract (Other academic)
Abstract [en]

Investigating Undergraduate Physics Lecturers’ disciplinary literacy Goals for their students.

Abstract

 In this presentation we use the concept of disciplinary literacy (Airey, 2011a; 2013) to analyse the expressed learning goals of university physics lecturers for their students. We define disciplinary literacy in terms of learning to control a particular set of multimodal communicative practices. We believe it is important to document the expressed intentions of lecturers in this way, since it has previously been suggested that the development of such disciplinary literacy may be seen as one of the primary goals of university studies (Airey, 2011a).

The main data set used in this presentation comes from a comparative study of 30 physics lecturers from Sweden and South Africa. (Airey, 2012, 2013; Linder et al, 2014). Semi-structured interviews were carried out using a disciplinary literacy discussion matrix (Airey, 2011b), which enabled us to probe the lecturers’ disciplinary literacy goals in the various semiotic resource systems used in undergraduate physics (e.g. graphs, diagrams, mathematics, spoken and written languages, etc.).

The findings suggest that physics lecturers in both countries have strikingly similar disciplinary literacy goals for their students and hold similar beliefs about disciplinary semiotic resources. The lecturers also agree that teaching disciplinary literacy ought not to be their job. Here though, there were differences in whether the lecturers teach students to handle disciplinary-specific semiotic resources. These differences appear to be based on individual decisions, rather than being specific to a particular country or institution.

Keywords: Higher education, Scientific literacy, Representations.

Introduction: disciplinary literacy

In this presentation we examine the notion of disciplinary literacy in university physics (see Airey, 2011a, 2011b, 2013 and the extensive overview in Moje, 2007). Drawing on the work of Gee (1991), Airey (2001a) has broadened the definition of literacy to include semiotic resource systems other than language, defining disciplinary literacy as:

The ability to appropriately participate in the communicative practices of a discipline.

He goes on to suggest that the development of disciplinary literacy may be seen as one of the primary goals of university studies. In this study we use this disciplinary literacy concept to compare and problematize the goals of undergraduate physics lecturers in Sweden and South Africa.

Research questions

Our research questions for this study are:

  1. What do physics lecturers at universities in Sweden and South Africa say about disciplinary literacy in terms of the range of semiotic resources they want their students to learn to master?
  2. To what extent do these physics lecturers say that they themselves take responsibility for the development of this disciplinary literacy in their students?

Data Collection

The data set used for this presentation is taken from a comparative research project where 30 university physics lecturers from a total of nine universities in Sweden (4) and South Africa (5) described the disciplinary literacy goals they have for their students (Airey, 2012, 2013; Linder et al, 2014). A disciplinary literacy discussion matrix (Airey, 2011b) was used as the basis for in-depth, semi-structured interviews.

These were conducted in English and lasted approximately 60 minutes each. In the interviews the lecturers were encouraged to talk about the semiotic resources they think their students need to learn to control.

Analysis

The analysis drew on ideas from the phenomenographic research tradition by treating the interview transcripts as a single data set or “pool of meaning” (Marton & Booth, 1997: 133). The aim was to understand the expressed disciplinary literacy goals of the physics lecturers interviewed. Following the approach to qualitative data analysis advocated by Bogdan and Biklen (1992), iterative cycles were made through the data looking for patterns and key statements. Each cycle resulted in loosely labeled categories that were often split up, renamed or amalgamated in the next iteration. More background and details of the approach used can be found in Airey (2012).

Results and Discussion

Analysis of the 30 interviews resulted in the identification of four themes with respect to the lecturers’ disciplinary literacy goals:

  1. Teaching physics is not the same thing as developing students’ disciplinary literacy.

All the lecturers expressed a strong commitment that physics is independent of the semiotic resources used to construct it. For them, developing disciplinary literacy and teaching physics were quite separate things.

These are tools, physics is something else. Physics is more than the sum of these tools it’s the way physicists think about things—a shared reference of how to analyse things around you.

This theme challenges contemporary thinking in education and linguistics. Halliday and Martin (1993, p. 9) for example insist that communicative practices are not some sort of passive reflection of a priori disciplinary knowledge, but rather are actively engaged in bringing knowledge into being. In science education, an even more radical stance has been taken by Wickman and Östman (2002), who insist that disciplinary learning itself should be viewed as a form of discourse change.

  1. Disciplinary literacy in a range of semiotic resources is necessary for learning physics.

All the lecturers in the study felt it was desirable that students develop disciplinary literacy in a range of semiotic resources in order to cope with their studies. In many ways this finding is unremarkable, with a number of researchers having commented on the wide range of semiotic systems needed for appropriate knowledge construction and communication in physics (e.g. Airey, 2009; Lemke, 1998; McDermott, 1990; Parodi, 2012).

  1. Developing disciplinary literacy is not really the job of a physics teacher.

All physics lecturers expressed frustration at the low levels of disciplinary literacy in their students, feeling that they really should not have to work with the development of these skills, e.g.:

I cannot say that I test them or train them in English. Of course they can always come and ask me, but I don’t think that I take responsibility for training them in English

Northedge (2002) holds that the role of a university lecturer should be one of a discourse guide leading “excursions” into disciplinary discourse. However, although some lecturers actually did in fact work in this way (see category 4) the none of physics lecturers interviewed in this study felt comfortable with this role.

  1. Some teachers were prepared to take responsibility for the development of certain aspects of students’ disciplinary literacy.

Nonetheless, some physics lecturers did say that the development of students’ disciplinary literacy would be something that they would work with. In these cases, lecturers (somewhat grudgingly) took on Northedge’s (2002) role of a discourse guide. This position was most common for mathematics, which was seen as essential for an understanding of physics (see Airey, 2012. p. 75 for further discussion of this theme).

To be able to express it in a precise enough way you need mathematics. Language is more limited than mathematics in this case. So they need to use mathematics to see physics rather than language.

 

Conclusion

In this presentation we have applied the concept of disciplinary literacy to the goals of university physics lecturers. Lecturers reported their belief that disciplinary literacy in a wide range of semiotic resources is a necessary condition for physics learning. However, the same lecturers do not feel the development of this disciplinary literacy is their job. Although some lecturers were prepared to help students develop specific aspects of disciplinary literacy, all the lecturers interviewed believed that teaching physics is something that is separate from teaching disciplinary literacy. Here, Airey has argued that:

Until lecturers see their role as one of socialising students into the discourse of their discipline…[they] will continue to insist that they are not [teachers of disciplinary literacy] and that this should be a job for someone else.                                                                                                                        (Airey, 2011b, p. 50)

References

Airey, J. (2009). Science, Language and Literacy. Case Studies of Learning in Swedish University Physics. Acta Universitatis Upsaliensis. Uppsala Dissertations from the Faculty of Science and Technology 81. Uppsala, Sweden.: http://www.diva-portal.org/smash/record.jsf?pid=diva2%3A173193&dswid=-4725.

Airey, J. (2011a). The Disciplinary Literacy Discussion Matrix: A Heuristic Tool for Initiating Collaboration in Higher Education. Across the disciplines, 8(3), unpaginated.

Airey, J. (2011b). Initiating Collaboration in Higher Education: Disciplinary Literacy and the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning Dynamic content and language collaboration in higher education: theory, research, and reflections (pp. 57-65). Cape Town, South Africa: Cape Peninsula University of Technology.

Airey, J. (2012). “I don’t teach language.” The linguistic attitudes of physics lecturers in Sweden. AILA Review, 25(2012), 64–79.

Airey, J. (2013). Disciplinary Literacy. In E. Lundqvist, L. Östman, & R. Säljö (Eds.), Scientific literacy – teori och praktik (pp. 41-58): Gleerups.

Bogdan, R. C., & Biklen, S. R. (1992). Qualitative research for education: An introduction to theory and methods. (2 ed.). Boston: Allyn and Bacon, Inc.

Gee, J. P. (1991). What is literacy? In C. Mitchell & K. Weiler (Eds.), Rewriting literacy: Culture and the discourse of the other (pp. 3-11). New York: Bergin & Garvey.

Halliday, M. A. K., & Martin, J. R. (1993). Writing science: Literacy and discursive power. London: The Falmer Press.

Lemke, J. L. (1998). Teaching all the languages of science: Words, symbols, images, and actions. http://academic.brooklyn.cuny.edu/education/jlemke/papers/barcelon.htm.

Linder, A., Airey, J., Mayaba, N., & Webb, P. (2014). Fostering Disciplinary Literacy? South African Physics Lecturers’ Educational Responses to their Students’ Lack of Representational Competence. African Journal of Research in Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 18(3), 242-252. doi:10.1080/10288457.2014.953294

Marton, F., & Booth, S. (1997). Learning and awareness. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

McDermott, L. (1990). A view from physics. In M. Gardner, J. G. Greeno, F. Reif, A. H. Schoenfeld, A. A. diSessa, & E. Stage (Eds.), Toward a scientific practice of science education (pp. 3-30). Hillsdale: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Moje, E. B. (2007). Developing Socially Just Subject-Matter Instruction: A Review of the Literature on Disciplinary Literacy Teaching. Review of Research in Education 31 (March 2007), 1–44.

Northedge, A. (2002). Organizing excursions into specialist discourse communities: A sociocultural account of university teaching. In G. Wells & G. Claxton (Eds.), Learning for life in the 21st century. Sociocultural perspectives on the future of education (pp. 252-264). Oxford: Blackwell Publishers.

Parodi, G. (2012) University Genres and Multisemiotic Features: Accessing Specialized Knowledge Through Disciplinarity. Fórum Linguístico. 9:4, 259-282.

Wickman, P.-O., & Östman, L. (2002). Learning as discourse change: A sociocultural mechanism. Science Education, 86(5), 601-623.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Dublin: ESERA, 2017
Keywords
Disciplinary Literacy, Undergraduate physics
National Category
Other Physics Topics Didactics
Research subject
Physics with specialization in Elementary Particle Physics
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:uu:diva-335281 (URN)
Conference
12th Conference of the European Science Education Research Association (ESERA 2017) DCU Dublin 21-25 Aug. 2017
Projects
VR projekt 2015-01891
Available from: 2017-12-03 Created: 2017-12-03 Last updated: 2018-01-22Bibliographically approved
Larsson, J. & Airey, J. (2015). The "physics expert" discourse model – counterproductive for trainee physics teachers' professional identity building?. In: 11th Conference of the European Science Education Research Association (ESERA), Helsinki, August 31 to September 4, 2015: . Paper presented at Conference of the European Science Education Research Association (ESERA).
Open this publication in new window or tab >>The "physics expert" discourse model – counterproductive for trainee physics teachers' professional identity building?
2015 (English)In: 11th Conference of the European Science Education Research Association (ESERA), Helsinki, August 31 to September 4, 2015, 2015Conference paper, Oral presentation with published abstract (Refereed)
Abstract [en]

In this paper we investigate the discourse models enacted in three different sections of a Swedish physics teacher training programme: the physics department, the education department and school. We are interested in what happens when the culture of physics meets the cultures of education and school within physics teacher education and the potential effects of these three cultures on trainee physics teachers’ professional identity building.

Working at a large university in Sweden, we conducted semi structured interviews with nine teacher educators—three from each section of the programme. In our analysis we identified several discourse models in the interviewees’ talk about the goals of physics teacher training. We focus in particular on the physics expert model that dominated amongst the teacher trainers at the physics department and also amongst school placement supervisors. In this model, the primary goal of physics teaching is to create future physics experts. The physics expert discourse model coexists with several other discourse models that value quite different goals such as the development of practical skills, reflective practice, critical thinking and citizenship. These potentially competing models were more likely to be invoked in the education department.

Finally we highlight the potential problems the physics expert discourse model can cause for physics teachers’ professional identity. We argue that a better understanding of the range of potentially competing discourse models would allow teacher trainers to make conscious, informed decisions about the training environment. We also suggest that knowledge of these models is important for trainee physics teachers since it empowers them to question the kind of teacher they want to become.

National Category
Physical Sciences Didactics Pedagogy Gender Studies
Research subject
Physics with specialization in Physics Education
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:uu:diva-262243 (URN)
Conference
Conference of the European Science Education Research Association (ESERA)
Available from: 2015-09-10 Created: 2015-09-10 Last updated: 2019-10-03
Larsson, J. & Airey, J. (2014). Searching for stories: The training environment as a constituting factor in the professional identity work of future physics teachers.. In: 2014 British Educational Research Association Annual Conference, London, September 2014: . Paper presented at BERA 2014, British Educational Research Association Annual Conference, London, 23-25 September 2014.
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Searching for stories: The training environment as a constituting factor in the professional identity work of future physics teachers.
2014 (English)In: 2014 British Educational Research Association Annual Conference, London, September 2014, 2014Conference paper, Oral presentation only (Other academic)
Abstract [en]

In Sweden, as in many other countries, the education of high-school physics teachers istypically carried out in three different environments; the education department, thephysics department and school itself during teaching practice. Trainee physics teachersare in the process of building their professional identity as they move between thesethree environments. Although much has been written about teacher professional identity(see overview in Beijaard, Meijer, & Verloop, 2004) little is known about how encounterswith the potentially disparate notions of “what counts” in these three environments feedinto trainee physics teachers’ professional identity work.

In this paper we investigate the discourse models (Gee, 2005) that can be found in thethree environments and the potential effects these may have on the professional identitynarratives that trainee physics teachers can invoke. Here, our theoretical frameworkdraws from the ideas of Sfard and Pruzak (2005) who suggest that teacher identities maybe defined as collections of stories. In the words of Watson (2006: 510) “peopleconstruct narratives and narratives construct people, and our identities emerge throughthese processes”. For the purposes of this paper, then, we take professional identity asconsisting of the set of narratives trainee teachers collect about what it means to be aphysics teacher. Such narratives will not only be told and retold but also lived in thepractice of teaching (Connelly & Clandinin, 1999).

Our research questions are as follows:

1. What is signalled as valued (and not valued) by members of the three environmentsphysics teachers meet during their training (school, education department, physicsdepartment)?

2. What discourse models can be identified from these value statements?

3. What is the potential effect of these discourse models on the narratives traineephysics teachers can tell about themselves as professionals?We carried out semi-structured interviews with instructors from the three environments.

Our analysis involved iterative coding of the interview transcripts (Bogdan & Biklen,1992) to construct discourse models. We identify a number of competing discoursemodels and discuss the ways in which these models can be seen to be at work, dictatingwhich narratives are available and disallowed in the three environments. We illustrate ourfindings by relating the narratives of the informants themselves in the interviews to theavailable discourse models we found.

The study illustrates the problematic identity work needed to construct professionalphysics teacher identities from a disparate set of available narratives.

National Category
Other Physics Topics Didactics
Research subject
Physics with specialization in Physics Education
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:uu:diva-233333 (URN)
Conference
BERA 2014, British Educational Research Association Annual Conference, London, 23-25 September 2014
Available from: 2014-10-02 Created: 2014-10-02 Last updated: 2018-05-30Bibliographically approved
Larsson, J. & Airey, J. (2013). Exploring the interplay between disciplinary and professional discourses and the developing professional identity of trainee physics teachers. In: : . Paper presented at Nordic Physics Days, Lund University, June 12-14, 2013.
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Exploring the interplay between disciplinary and professional discourses and the developing professional identity of trainee physics teachers
2013 (English)Conference paper, Poster (with or without abstract) (Other academic)
Abstract [en]

The motivation for this recently started project is grounded in the shortage of qualified highschool physics teachers in Sweden. Presently, few choose to study physics, both in Sweden and internationally, and even fewer enrol in physics teacher training programs (Statistics Sweden,2011; American association of physics teachers, 1996). What is it that these students are choosing not to become? One aspect of understanding this situation is to look at it from the perspective of a future physics teacher. What potential modes of professional identity are made available for physics teacher students by the education? (Beauchamp & Thomas, 2009) The training of high school physics teachers in Sweden is typically carried out in three separate environments: the university physics department, the university education department and in schools during teaching practice (VFU). Trainee physics teachers need to negotiate this intersection in resonance with their own learning goals and expectations. However, little is known about how this negotiation affects the students’ developing professional identity (Connelly & Clandinin, 1999; Beijaard, Verloop, & Vermunt, 2000) as physics teachers. The main focus of this project is to explore aspects of how identities of trainee physics teachers develop in response to the disciplinary and professional discourses they encounter during their university studies. In a first pilot study, we will carry out a survey where we investigate different standpoints on what makes a good or bad physics teacher. The survey will cover the views of various stakeholders in the three environments mentioned above. The aim is to produce a first coarse-grained picture of how attitudes about physics teacher education differ in the different environments. In parallel, a second study of what knowledge is valued for a physics teacher in the three different environments will be carried out. This objective will involve an examination of teacher training curricula together with semi-structured interviews with key informants. Based on the outcomes of the two studies described above, decisions will be made on an appropriate methodology for continued investigations of what is valued in the different environments that trainee physics teachers meet, and how this potentially affects a trainee’s developing professional identity. We envisage that issues of disciplinary discourses (Becher &Trowler, 1989), gender (Danielsson, 2009), social background (Beijaard et al., 2000), power and status would play a major role in the analysis.

References

American association of physics teachers. (1996). Physics at the crossroads. Retrieved March 15, 2013, from http://www.aapt.org/Events/crossroads.cfm

Beauchamp, C., & Thomas, L. (2009). Understanding teacher identity: an overview of issues in the literature and implications for teacher education. Cambridge Journal of Education, 39, 175–189.

Becher, T., & Trowler, P. R. (1989). Academic tribes and territories. Society for Research into Higher Education & Open University Press Milton Keynes.

Beijaard, D., Verloop, N., & Vermunt, J. D. (2000). Teachers’ perceptions of professional identity: an exploratory study from a personal knowledge perspective. Teaching and Teacher Education, 16,749–764.

Connelly, F. M., & Clandinin, D. J. (1999). Shaping a professional identity : stories of educational practice. New York: Teachers College Press.

Danielsson, A. T. (2009). Doing physics - doing gender : an exploration of physics students’ identity constitution in the context of laboratory work.

Statistics Sweden. (2011). Trender och prognoser 2011.

National Category
Physical Sciences
Research subject
Physics with specialization in Physics Education
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:uu:diva-217413 (URN)
Conference
Nordic Physics Days, Lund University, June 12-14, 2013
Available from: 2014-02-03 Created: 2014-02-03 Last updated: 2018-05-30
Larsson, J. & Airey, J. (2013). Hur samspelar disciplinära och professionella diskurser i utvecklingen av fysiklärarstudenters professionella identitet?. In: : . Paper presented at Teknisk-naturvetenskapliga fakultetens Universitetspedagogiska Konferens 2013; 2013-04-19, Uppsala universitet; Uppsala, Sweden.
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Hur samspelar disciplinära och professionella diskurser i utvecklingen av fysiklärarstudenters professionella identitet?
2013 (Swedish)Conference paper, Poster (with or without abstract) (Other academic)
Abstract [sv]

Det här projektet fokuserar på hur fysiklärarstudenters professionella identitet skapas och utvecklas i samverkan med de professionella och disciplinära diskurser (Becher och Trowler1989) de möter i sin utbildning. Projektet är fortfarande i sin startfas och motiveras av att det saknas utbildade fysiklärare samtidigt som få nya studenter väljer att läsa fysiklärarutbildningar. (Statistiska Centralbyrån 2011) Ett sätt att se på denna problematik är att fråga sig vad det är som de potentiella lärarstudenterna väljer eller väljer bort i sitt utbildningsval. Vilka former av professionell identitet har fysiklärarutbildningen att erbjuda? (Beauchamp och Thomas 2009) Fysiklärarutbildningen i Sverige är uppdelad på tre miljöer, fysikinstitutionen, utbildningsinstitutionenoch skolor under VFU. Intrycken från dessa tre miljöer ska sedan fogas samman till någonting helt för att i resonans med studentens egna mål och förväntningar skapa en framtida professionell identitet. I en första pilotstudie ska vi genom enkäter, intervjuer och studierav läroplaner undersöka hur nyckelpersoner i dessa miljöer ser på fysiklärarutbildningen. Vad innebär det att vara en bra fysiklärare och vilken kunskap värdesätts? Val av teori och metod för det fortsatta arbetet kommer att baseras på resultaten av denna första studie. Vi förväntar oss att frågor rörande genus, social bakgrund, makt och status kommer att påverka analysen (Danielsson 2009; Beijaard m. fl. 2000).

Referenser

Beauchamp, Catherine och Lynn Thomas (2009). »Understanding teacher identity: an overview of issues in the literature and implications for teacher education«. I: Cambridge Journal of Education 39(2), s. 175–189.Becher, Tony och Paul R. Trowler (1989). Academic tribes and territories. Society for Research into Higher Education & Open University Press Milton Keynes. Beijaard, Douwe, Nico Verloop och Jan D Vermunt (2000). »Teachers’ perceptions of professional identity: an exploratory study from a personal knowledge perspective«. I: Teaching and TeacherEducation 16 (7), s. 749–764. Danielsson, Anna T. (2009). »Doing Physics - Doing Gender : An Exploration of Physics Students’ Identity Constitution in the Context of Laboratory Work«. eng. I: Statistiska Centralbyrån (2011). Trender och Prognoser 2011.

National Category
Physical Sciences
Research subject
Physics with specialization in Physics Education
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:uu:diva-217404 (URN)
Conference
Teknisk-naturvetenskapliga fakultetens Universitetspedagogiska Konferens 2013; 2013-04-19, Uppsala universitet; Uppsala, Sweden
Available from: 2014-02-03 Created: 2014-02-03 Last updated: 2019-10-03Bibliographically approved
Organisations
Identifiers
ORCID iD: ORCID iD iconorcid.org/0000-0002-6265-0004

Search in DiVA

Show all publications